1 state or 2 states

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3329865,00.html

The writer of the article In his sagacious analysis didn't factor in all the usurpation that has been taking place in the Palestinian occupied territories since June 1967. If he adds up all of the Israeli settlements blocks, the Jewish settlers only roads, the areas taken by the apartheid wall, and the newly planned additional housing units slated for expanding the existing settlements, it will leave him with only 45% of the land existed prior to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank in 1967.The residual land represents only about 10 to 12% of the historical Palestinian land. In addition, the realities on the ground nowadays tells a different story, Israel already has a total and complete control of all of the Palestinian territories, the three noncontiguous Palestinian enclaves as well as Gaza Strip are cut off from the outside world. In order for a viable two state solution to be implemented a complete reversal of everything that took place in the occupied territories need to be taken into consideration, a tall order that is impossible to achieve given the current circumstances. So yes a two state solution is equally as bad as one binational state solution. The only solution that is doable and achievable is the one that tells Israel to comply with the international resolutions spelled out in the United Nation Security council resolutions 242, and 338. While this demand may sound like a broken record since it usually falls on deaf ears, it remains to be the most powerful & the most widely recognized solution. Advocates of the one state and the two states may continue their dialogue in the coming months and years, unless Israel comes to the realization that the Palestinian people must be given their independence, we will continue with our futile haggling over one binational state and two state solution until dooms day.
Hatem Abunimeh
habunimeh@yahoo.com